Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ramavtar @ Ramotar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 February, 2019
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC-8513-2019
(RAMAVTAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Gwalior, Dated : 27/02/2019
Shri Anshu Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri S.K. Mishra, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent-
State.
Case Diary is perused.
Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard. The applicant has filed this third application under section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. Earlier bail application was dismissed on merits vide order dated 23.01.2019 in M.Cr.C No.49365/2018.
The applicant has been arrested on 18/07/2018 by Police Station Avada, District Sheopur in connection with Crime No.30/2018 registered in relation to the offences punishable under Sections 307, 326, 506/34, 294, 323, 324 and 325 of the IPC.
Prosecution story, in short, is that the complainant lodged the FIR to the effect that he along with his son went to Bhanwar Lal to ask his money which was given to Bhanwar Lal by the complainant. On that, the applicant along with co-accused started abusing with filthy language and assaulted the complainant, due to which, blood oozing out from the head of the complainant and then Bhanwar Lal also assaulted the complainant by lathi on the left hand, due to which the complainant received injuries. When the complainant cried, some persons came to save him. Seeing them, the applicant and co-accused THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC-8513-2019 (RAMAVTAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH) ran away from the spot threatening to kill. On the basis of aforesaid, crime has been registered against the applicant.
It is the submission of learned counsel for applicant that the complainant-Prathvipal Singh has not supported the story of prosecution in his Court's statement as PW/2. He turned hostile. His father is also turned hostile and did not support the story of prosecution. The applicant is the permanent resident of Koshalpur Ka Tapra, Police Station, Avada, District Sheopur. There is no likelihood of his absconsion or tampering with the prosecution evidence, if he is released on bail. No further custodial interrogation is required in the matter. The applicant is in jail since 18/07/2018 without any substantial reason and early conclusion of the trial is a bleak possibility and prolonged pre-trial detention is an anathema to the concept of liberty. The applicant is ready to abide by all the terms and conditions as may be imposed by this Court. Under these circumstances, he prays for grant of bail.
Learned Public Prosecutor for the State has opposed the application and prayed for its rejection by contending that on the basis of the allegations and the material available on record, no case for grant of bail is made out.
Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and that complainant and his father have turned hostile, I am of the opinion THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC-8513-2019 (RAMAVTAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH) that this is a fit case to grant the bail to the applicant.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with two local solvent sureties each of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant :
1. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
2. The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;
3. The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be.
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;
5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial;
6. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be; and A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance.
Certified copy as per rules.
(S.A. Dharmadhikari) JUDGE LJ* LOKENDRA JAIN 2019.02.27 16:45:15 +05'30'